FR 2021-02334

General Summary

The document from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is a notification concerning the Central Gulf of Alaska (GOA) Rockfish Program. It provides details about the standard prices and fee percentage for cost recovery, which is the process of recouping management and enforcement costs associated with the program. In this context, the ex-vessel value, or the price of fish when they are first landed, is crucial as it determines the fee amount. For the 2020 fishing year, the document fixed this fee at 3.0% of the ex-vessel value, consistent with 2019 despite actual costs indicating a potential fee of 3.66%.

Significant Issues or Concerns

The principal concern is the discrepancy between the actual cost percentage (3.66%) needed for program recovery and the capped fee percentage (3.0%). Given that the fee cannot exceed 3% by law, NMFS needs to balance budget constraints with legal parameters. This raises questions about whether the fee adequately covers costs or places undue financial strain on cooperatives, despite lower costs compared to the previous year.

Additionally, the document could be clearer regarding the calculation and determination of "standard ex-vessel prices," which affects the fees that cooperatives must pay. The absence of a detailed methodology might lead to confusion and misunderstanding among cooperating parties.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

For the general public, the immediate impact is minimal, as the intricacies of fisheries management and associated cost recovery fees primarily concern those directly involved in the industry. However, sustaining effective fisheries management indirectly benefits the broader community by ensuring fishery resources are responsibly used and preserved.

Specific stakeholders, particularly rockfish cooperatives, face more direct consequences. The fixed 3% fee impacts their financial planning, and the penalties for late payment are severe, threatening their operational capabilities by delaying quota share transfers. This document serves as a reminder of the administrative responsibilities that come with cooperative membership and fisheries management.

Positive and Negative Impacts

The regulation can positively ensure program sustainability and resource allocation by recovering management costs, which is crucial for long-term marine resource health. However, the perception of fairness might be strained by the disconnect between actual and capped fees. Stakeholders may feel burdened by costs that, due to decreased fishery values, could appear more onerous than the preceding year. Furthermore, financial transparency, particularly regarding specific expenditure categories, could enhance stakeholder trust and understanding of the fees' necessity.

In conclusion, while the document provides crucial information for stakeholders, the complexity and potential financial implications suggest a need for improved clarity and communication around fee calculations and usage.

The document from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) highlights key financial aspects surrounding the Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Program. Participants in this program, primarily rockfish cooperatives, are subject to a cost recovery fee of 3.0 percent based on the standard ex-vessel value of the fish. This financial mechanism is established to recoup costs related to program management, data collection, and enforcement as dictated by federal law.

Financial Implications

The primary financial reference in the document is the 3.0 percent fee assessed against the value of rockfish primary and secondary species. This fee is calculated using a formula that takes into account the program's total management costs and the overall value of the fish landed. Notably, this year's fee calculation initially resulted in a figure of 3.66 percent. However, due to legal constraints, the fee was capped at 3.0 percent. This adjustment implicitly suggests that while program costs may have decreased, the overall value of the fishery also saw a significant decrease—reported to be 26.2 percent.

This fee is central to supporting the program, but it raises concerns about whether it imposes an additional financial burden on rockfish cooperatives. Although the document describes the fee calculation process briefly, the complexity involved may not be entirely clear to all participants, especially those without a regulatory or financial background.

Disclosure of Standard Ex-vessel Prices

The document mentions that standard ex-vessel prices are described in U.S. dollars per pound, but it lacks detailed disclosure on how these prices are determined. A more in-depth explanation or methodology could contribute to transparency, ensuring that stakeholders understand how these standards affect the fees they ultimately pay. This ambiguity may lead to questions or dissatisfaction among the cooperatives who are expected to comply with these financial obligations.

Payment Compliance and Penalties

Timely payment of this fee is critical for cooperatives, as failure to pay by the designated deadline of February 15 can have severe consequences. Such repercussions include the non-transferability of quota shares and loss of eligibility to receive future shares. These financial and operational penalties could significantly impact cooperative planning and operations, reaffirming the importance of financial compliance within the program.

Transparency in Program Costs

Lastly, the issue of transparency extends to the 'direct program costs' referenced in the document. While the categories such as labor, travel, and procurement are mentioned, there is a lack of detailed accounting or breakdown which might help participants and stakeholders better understand where their fees are allocated. Providing more detail could foster better stakeholder relations and aid in evaluating whether funds are efficiently utilized relative to the operation and success of the Rockfish Program.

By clearly defining these financial elements and their implications, NMFS can enhance understanding and cooperation from all involved parties, facilitating a smoother implementation of the regulatory framework governing the Rockfish Program.